Loser of Republican Congressional Primary in Oklahoma Plans to Contest Election …Claims Body Double of “Dead” Incumbent Defeated Him

Rep. Frank Lucas of Oklahoma
Rep. Frank Lucas of Oklahoma

Submitted by Elaine Magliaro, Weekend Contributor

Frank Dean Lucas, a Republican, is the U.S. Representative for Oklahoma’s 3rd congressional district. Prior to representing the 3rd district, he served the 6th district from 1994 to 2003. Lucas currently chairs the House Committee on Agriculture. He also serves on the House Committee on Financial Services and the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology. Last Tuesday, Rep. Lucas won his Republican primary easily—garnering more than 80% of the vote. His primary opponent Timothy Ray Murray—who received only 5.2% of the vote—is planning to contest the election. Murray’s reason for contesting the election: He claims that Lucas was executed three years ago by the World Court and that the Congressman has been replaced by a body double. Murray even suggested on his campaign website that the “Frank Lucas” who bested him in the primary might be an artificial look alike or a man-made replacement.

In a press release posted on his website, Murray wrote, “The election for U.S. House for Oklahoma’s 3rd District will be contested by the Candidate, Timothy Ray Murray. I will be stating that his votes are switched with Rep. Lucas votes, because it is widely known Rep. Frank D. Lucas is no longer alive and has been displayed by a look alike.”

From Murray’s website:

I, Timothy Ray Murray, am a human, born in Oklahoma, and obtained and continue to fully meet the requirements to serve as U.S. Representative when honored to so.  I will never use a look alike to replace my (The Office’s) message to you or to anyone else, as both the other Republican Challengers have. Rep. Frank Lucas, and a few other Oklahoma and other States’ Congressional Members were depicted as being executed by The World Court on or about Jan. 11, 2011 in Southern Ukraine. On television they were depicted as being executed by the hanging about the neck until death on a white stage and in front of witnesses. Other now current Members of Congress have shared those facts on television also. We know that it is possible to use look alike artificial or manmade replacements, however Rep. Lucas was not eligible to serve as a Congressional Member after that time.

In a telephone conversation with Jaime Fuller of the Washington Post, Keith Gaddie at the University of Oklahoma said, “A lot of stupid things happen in Oklahoma politics, but this may be the stupidest I’ve ever heard. Welcome to Oklahoma.” (Note: Gaddie asked Fuller to make sure that the word “stupid” appeared in his quote.)

More “stupid” from Murray’s website:

As your Ambassador, Hon. Timothy Ray Murray, for The People of The United States, I have:

     *  Requested and obtained in 2013, Protection from partial or whole life placement on Starship without the knowledge and or will of any person(s) on Earth or in Space, and the storage of partial human size life on Earth or in this Solar system. This matter is sealed with The People, The U.S. President, and The U.S. Supreme Court.

Talking Points Memo reported that Murray had previously challenged Lucas in 2012—while running as a Democrat.

I’m wondering about the 5.2% of the Oklahoma electorate who voted for this crackpot.

SOURCES

Primary Challenger Says GOP Rep. Was Executed, Replaced By Body Double (Talking Points Memo)

GOP Candidate Charges Opponent Is Dead, Represented By A Body Double (Huffington Post)

Oklahoma Republican Claims His Opponent Is A ‘Robot Look-Alike’ (Business Insider)

The Last Honest Man In Oklahoma (Esquire)

Oklahoma Republican claims congressional opponent is dead, replaced with body double (KFOR)

Frank Lucas (Wikipedia)

The Manchurian candidate….of Oklahoma? (Washington Post)

Timothy Ray Murray’s Website
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.

39 thoughts on “Loser of Republican Congressional Primary in Oklahoma Plans to Contest Election …Claims Body Double of “Dead” Incumbent Defeated Him

  1. The new reality show: Republican primaries. Primary loss by the sitting house whip, photos of rest home residents resulting in 4 arrests and a suicide from one side, an admission of doing strange things with animals from is opponent, and now a doppelganger and ETs. I’m getting a clue why the approval rating for Congress is in the toilet and it isn’t likely to get better.

  2. Sqeeky:

    “But then again I tend to be a non-partisan enjoyer of public insanity.”

    I know, right? Establishment politicians are off the rails, Pelosi especially so.

    Get ’em all out and vote for some new ones.

    Sorry about your back. Hope you’re feeling better.

  3. Filner headlock.

    Governor Brown raiding Cap & Trade funds for his pet vacation train project which will actually increase pollution.

    And yet there’s always people who think their party is free and clear of any weirdos.

    • SWM – first time around he was anything but capable. Governor Moonbeam has not changed, just learned to kick things down the road like Clinton did.

  4. I know, right? Establishment politicians are off the rails, Pelosi especially so. Karen Really? Talk about off the rails have you every listed to Texas Tea Partyers Louie Gohmert, Steve Stockman or a host of others.

  5. On the Miranda thread I tried to post:

    Max-1, yes, I’m on line, and I’ve done a few stints as an activist, as in the streets, not just on line. I’m probably in a file or two. 😦

    Must be I am on some list.

    I refreshed a few times, closed a number of tabs, must be a gremlin or one of the lists I’m on.

  6. Squeeky, Sorry for your health problems. Hope you are over the hump. Thankfully you’re not in the VA vortex!

  7. For myself, I contemplate the existential signification of, to use a (ridiculous?) religious term, the cracked pots, who have been broken into believing that actually-avoidable events actually happen.

    Imagine, hypothetically, an actual biologically-alive human person who made an avoidable mistake, which was the violation of some written statute enacted by a legislature and made law through an executive act, and not found unconstitutional by any judicial decision.

    Imagine (meaning, hypothetically) scientifically validating that the actually-avoidable mistake which the biologically-alive person actually made was, through rigorous scientific methodology/methodologies, demonstrated to have actually been avoidable?

    By what methodology or methodologies in the realm of scientifically-valid science (the pragmatically practicable alternative to scientifically-valid science is pseudoscience?), can hypothetically-scientifically-validating that any, and every, actually avoidable mistake was not actually avoided?

    At issue here may be that which Erik Homberger Erikson, in his epigenetic chart of psychosocial developmental crises named “time confusion” and which neurologist Robert C. Scaer named, “time-corrupted learning” as “trauma” as “imprisonment of the mind” in his book, The Trauma Spectrum, Chapter Three.

    The book by Michael S. Gazzaniga (former president of the Association for Psychological Science), Who’s in Charge?: Free Will and the Science of the Brain, Ecco (a HarperCollins imprint), 2011, contains the following text, here quoted in accord with my grasp of fair use, from page 106:

    “When all the great minds of the past dealt with the question of free will, the stark reality and clarity that we are big animals, albeit with unique attributes, was not fully appreciated and accepted. The powerful idea of determinism, however, was apparent and appreciated. At the same time, and prior to the startling advances in neuroscience, explanations of mechanisms were unknown. Today they are. Today we know that we are evolved entities that work like a Swiss clock. Today, more than ever before, we need to know where we stand on the central question of whether or not we are agents who are to be held accountable and responsible for our actions. It sure seems like we should be. The issue isn’t whether or not we are “free.” The issue is that there is no scientific reason not to hold people accountable and responsible.”

    Oopsie!

    I surmise that Michael S. Gazzaniga has not studied my bioengineering dissertation well enough (if at all?) to have been able to grasp as biological fact that there is a profound scientific reason to not hold people accountable and responsible, especially through an adversarial process of interpretation.

    I surmise that Michael S. Gazzaniga may not have studied nearly enough about core aspects of neurobiology which include enough of quantum mechanics as to have understood accurately how the slight “iffyness” that quantum mechanical phenomena impose on very complex neural networks (like, human brains, for example) sufficiently overcomes determinism as to make accountability and responsibility as in traditional U.S. courts of law pure pseudoscience.

    In stark contrast with what I surmise about Michael S. Gazzaniga, I have studied the relationship of quantum-mechanical “iffyness” with human decision-making, and I find that, were that iffyness not present, human creativity would be biologically impossible.

    It is both philosophically and biologically impossible to have the quantum-mechanical neural network iffyness which enables human creativity without concurrently having decisions occur which necessarily invalidate traditional notions of accountability and responsibility.

    What I know, what I understand, is that “we” are not “evolved entities tthat work like a Swiss clock.” Until it wears out, or is not wound up (however winding a Swiss clock is accomplished, so that the clock runs), a Swiss clock is a rigorously deterministic mechanism. However the wearing out or the not-winding of a Swiss clock is decidedly somewhat iffy, and, thus, somewhat quantum-mechanical in both nature and function.

    Ignorance is a good stand-in for accurate knowledge and accurate understanding only so long as accurate knowledge and accurate understanding are not actually available.

Comments are closed.